cvs commit: doc/zh_TW.Big5/books/zh-tut Makefile zh-tut.sgml

[Hiroki Sato]

chinsan <chinsan.tw at gmail.com> wrote
  in <1f27304c0607100524n19f54596n306c35228dad7d6a at mail.gmail.com>:

ch> However, The real problem in fact is we have to create some native,tutorial,
ch> useful document, and these document must have "FDP-compliant" which
ch> defined(by you) English must always first.

 No, I use "FDP-compliant" for directory structure of the document and so on.
 Whether there has to always be with the English counterpart or not is
 what I want to discuss here.

ch> Or do you think to write in native language(ie. Japanese) is more difficult
ch> than non-native language?
ch> Please answer "yes" or "no." If "no," please list the differences
ch> between native and non-native.

 I am still not sure what you are trying to mean.  I think writing documents
 in the native language is easier for the author, but it is not a problem
 I raised.  The point is that the original document in the tree is,
 regardless it is written in English or other languages, an "official" one.
 As I wrote in the previous mail, I think most of us are considering that
 the English documents are official and original, and we have a rough
 consensus on that the official language of our documentation set is English.
 For example, the latest release includes the English release documents only,
 and just before the doc tree is tagged updating English documents has
 our priority.  All of them are based on the idea.

 Importing a non-English document without the English counterpart can break
 this supposition.  This means that we must maintain original documents
 written in non-English languages.  This is what I want to discuss here.
 I think it is too difficult to maintain original (official) documents written
 in various languages, and even if such importing is allowed we must have
 a guideline.  Please imagine various documents in various languages
 inconsistently imported in the name of usefulness.  No one can control
 the quality and the release engineering becomes quite difficult.  I think
 we must consider the positive and the negative effects of it and
 reach a consensus now.

 I DO NOT insist that non-translation documents in non-English languages
 should be removed immediately.  Also, my comments in this series of emails
 are not on behalf of doceng@, and I never request vanilla@ to remove zh-tut.
 Any comments are welcome.

ch> Finally, as you said: "there is no common view about adding something other than
ch>  the translations into there (AFAIK)", can you explain why the
ch> following document exist?
ch> fr_FR.ISO8859-1/articles/ddwg
ch> fr_FR.ISO8859-1/articles/ip-aliasing
ch> fr_FR.ISO8859-1/articles/make-world
ch> fr_FR.ISO8859-1/articles/ntfs
ch> fr_FR.ISO8859-1/articles/ppp
ch> it_IT.ISO8859-15/books/unix-introduction

 Yes, I said "there is no common view".  These imports and zh-tut are done
 just because of it.  So, I raise this as an issue.
 I took a cue from zh-tut actually, but I am not talking about zh-tut only.

ch> If you feel that question's unfair, please give me your vision for
ch> FDP's spirit, philosophy and all the game rules.
ch> Make it clear and honest, without finessing or posturing.

 Again, I use the word FDP as the conventions such as directory layout
 and so on.  They are not spiritual ones.

--
| Hiroki SATO
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-doc/attachments/20060710/5237ab8a/attachment.sig>